Originally posted by NewjakI'm going to say the same thing I say to everyone, for someone in real poverty religion provides hope and a way to contextualise and cope with suffering. I have seen people in the third world lose everything , I have seen the role of religion no longer required for many in the west. I say many because for some lives are desperate still. Who am I to judge them for using anything to ease the pain.
Religion was a tool that we evolved to help us manage ourselves.We have since developed better tools for this. So I think modern society doesn't need religion and especially doesn't need religion in decision making.
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!sounds like mother Theresa. Her belief was people need to suffer through poverty to understand morality and virtue. I disagree, but your post reminded me of that.
I'm going to say the same thing I say to everyone, for someone in real poverty religion provides hope and a way to contextualise and cope with suffering. I have seen people in the third world lose everything , I have seen the role of religion no longer required for many in the west. I say many because for some lives are desperate still. Who am I to judge them for using anything to ease the pain.
Originally posted by Blakemoremany religions are tools for poor people with very little coping with a lot of bad most people in the first world are insulated from. Buddhism and Christianity particularly are about coping with life's lot. The are efficient too.
sounds like mother Theresa. Her belief was people need to suffer through poverty to understand morality and virtue. I disagree, but your post reminded me of that.
In countries where most people live hand to mouth and don't have electricity, medical insurance or hot running water. Whose children are likely to die at birth and every birth is a risk for the mother, hope something better is somewhere is what it's all about. If you've lost all your kids to Malaria, you understand a need to hope they'll see them again.
I think every fat westerner, should see the results of war. I don't mean as part of s military unit, I mean after the action is over, the limbs blown off by land mines, the lack of any kind of structue the lack of food. The sewage in the streets, the disease. It will change them fundamentally. Trust me on this.
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!my grandfather was a doctor in Botswana who treated malaria patients, black and white. Science is clearly a much better method than some shit from thousands of years ago.
In countries where most people live hand to mouth and don't have electricity, medical insurance or hot running water. Whose children are likely to die at birth and every birth is a risk for the mother, hope something better is somewhere is what it's all about. If you've lost all your kids to Malaria, you understand a need to hope they'll see them again.
Originally posted by BlakemoreScience can cure the disease. It doesn't help people with nothing cope with the loss of the only possession the poor have, their loved ones. Btw, good on your Grandfather.
my grandfather was a doctor in Botswana who treated malaria patients, black and white. Science is clearly a much better method than some shit from thousands of years ago.
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!good intentions don’t have to be based on ancient religious bs. The scientists i listed even rejected religion in their later years. Even jimmy carter, who won on the platform of being a devout Christian rejects religion now, mostly due to how the republicans exploited that angle in the 80s.
Science can cure the disease. It doesn't help people with nothing cope with the loss of the only possession the poor have, their loved ones. Btw, good on your Grandfather.